A lot of nuclear and coal plants in Europe sre switched off because there's not enough cool river wster to cool them.
Nuclear power fails with global warming
Gas makes up only around 13% of Germany's electricity, so why should it dominate the price? The answer lies in how the energy market works: The grid operator stacks all bids from cheapest to most expensive... Wind turbines and solar panels have a marginal cost of essentially zero. When they flood the market, they push expensive gas plants down... Gas no longer sets the price in every hour. On a sunny summer day, so much solar can pour into the German grid that wholesale prices can even become negative.
there's a lot more renewable power than there used to be. Germany's electricity mix has transformed: renewables have grown from under 10% in 2002 to over 60% today. Nuclear is gone since April 2023. Coal has been roughly halved. The more hours renewables dominate, the more the annual average electricity price breaks away from what gas alone would predict.
So… has it decoupled yet?
The solid line is Germany's actual wholesale electricity price; the dashed line is what the price would be if gas still set it every hour. For years, the two ran nearly on top of each other. But in recent years, a gap has been opening.
Gas prices have risen again — driven by wars, geopolitical risks, and competition for LNG — yet electricity hasn't followed with the same intensity. Every new gigawatt of solar, every hour where wind sets the price instead of gas, widens the gap a little more, resulting in lower prices for consumers.
Stout doesn't care about other factors. Taxes schmaxes means: 'I've found something that makes it seem as if Trump and I are right about renewables making electricity more expensive, and I'll ignore anything that shows the opposite is the case, be it taxes, sabotaged Russian pipelines or the Russian-Ukrainian or American-Iranian wars.'
No. It took 50 years to close them down. The fossil-fuel plants should be closed down, too, and replaced by solar & wind farms. It's not going fast enough.
Lee West on bsky, Aug 8, 2026
WTF? Amazon received a permit from the state of #Texas allowing its new gas power plant to emit 33 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere — the largest single source of pollution in the United States.
Amazon Is Creating the Biggest Pollution Source in the Entire Country (The New Republic, Aug 7, 2026)
Amazon has bought a site in Texas where it plans to build a data center campus.
Amazon is quietly trying to build the biggest gas power plant in the country.
The Distilled newsletter reported Friday that the megacorporation has bought land and acquired permits in Pecos County, Texas, for an AI data center powered by a 7.65 gigawatt gas power plant. The plant will be completely separate from Texas’s power grid, at least in the beginning, the permits show.
Good to see the gap actually widening but it's not really significant when held up to what I pay for my (98%) renewable energy. I pay about 20% of what Germans pay. So a little bit cheaper, but not actually cheap.
Stout moving the goalposts! Nobody saw that one coming! 'Germany has the highest electricity prices in Europe!'
– No, they don't. 'But Germany's prices are five times what they are in Canada because renewables are more expensive than fossil fuels!'
– No, 1) that's hyperbolic, and 2) that's not why Germany's prices are higher than Canada's. 'But electricity is much cheaper in Canada!' (Doesn't say it's because of fossil fuels versus renewables, but it's implied.)
– Let's play!
I ask Google, how come 's electricity prices are so much higher than 's?
German electricity prices are roughly three times higher than Canadian prices due to heavy taxes, high grid fees, and the expensive transition (!!!) to renewable energy combined with the phase-out of nuclear and fossil plants. Canada benefits from abundant, cheap domestic hydroelectric(!!!) and natural gas resources. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Electricity prices vary significantly across these three nations. Canada offers relatively low rates averaging around $0.12 USD/kWh, Iceland maintains moderate-to-low residential rates near $0.18–$0.21 USD/kWh with much cheaper commercial costs, and Germany has some of the highest rates globally, averaging about $0.40–$0.43 USD/kWh due to heavy taxes and grid fees. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Germany’s grid fees (Netzentgelte) are regulated charges levied by electricity network operators to cover the costs of building, maintaining, and expanding transmissions and distribution power grids. Making up roughly 20% to 28% of a consumer's total electricity bill, these fees vary significantly by region and are transitioning toward dynamic, time-variable structures to reward grid-friendly behavior. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
I get a bad feeling about this and ask Google, Who operates 's grid?
Transmission System Operators (TSOs): TenneT Germany: Operates the largest transmission area, running from the Danish border down to the Alps. 50Hertz Transmission: Manages the grid across northern and eastern Germany. Amprion: Controls the network spanning parts of western and southern Germany. TransnetBW: Oversees the transmission system in the southwestern state of Baden-Württemberg. [1, 2, 3]
So has four private business operators, one them with what appears to be almost a monopoly on long-distance transmission and two controlling southern states, i.e. the place where electricity prices would be the highest if it weren't for the price equalization that makes northern states (with renewables) pay higher prices than they would otherwise have to.
Yeah, that's a rational capitalist way to run things!
Besides, as for the headline of my post, Stout compares electricity prices in a country with cheap domestic sources of energy (hydro (!) and gas) with a country transitioning to renewables that has to import fossil fuels – and is doing so because business interests make it less profitable for energy companies to make the transition as long as it can make northern states that have been doing the transition for some time pay for the equalization of their prices with the high prices in radical right-wing fossil-fuel importing southern states. and .
Is Stout going to complain about "AI slop" again? We'll see!
He can check Google's sources (linked in the quotations) and tell us what he comes up with!
In the meantime, and while Canadas's and Europe's forests are burning, he's taking pride in this state of things: CO₂ emissions per capita
Lee West on bsky, Aug 8, 2026
Long pushed as a cleaner energy source, natural gas is no more natural than coal or oil. Discover why continued reliance on this fossil fuel will mean disaster for our climate and health.
Under the Lens: The Truth About Natural Gas (CleanWisconsin.org)
from a climate perspective there are two main issues with increased production of natural gas. The first is that while burning natural gas emits less CO2 than other fossil fuels, it is still emitting CO2. As made clear in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent assessment of climate change science, we need to reach net zero carbon emissions by mid-century to limit global warming to 1.5-2°C, the goal set by the Paris Agreement in 2015. Thus, the relevant comparison point for natural gas is no longer to coal and other fossil fuels, but to carbon-free energy sources like wind and solar.
A lot of nuclear and coal plants in Europe are switched off because there's not enough cool river wster to cool them.
Nuclear power fails with global warming
Rivers have this thing. Sometimes there's too little water and sometimes there's too much:
2024 Central European floods: Romania (Wikipedia)
Seven people were reported dead as the result of floods in Romania. Galați and Vaslui Counties were severely impacted by the floods caused by Storm Boris, with multiple villages submerged, key infrastructure damaged, and thousands of residents displaced.
Romania delays effort to divert Danube water to nuclear reactor as shutdown looms (Reuters, Aug 6, 2026)
Romania to create rerouting barrier by sinking rocks in the Danube
Measure should extend nuclear reactor operation to 9-10 days
Danube flow at record low due to drought
Government readies framework to cut power to industry if needed
Stout moving the goalposts! Nobody saw that one coming! 'Germany has the highest electricity prices in Europe!'
– No, they don't. 'But Germany's prices are five times what they are in Canada because renewables are more expensive than fossil fuels!'
– No, 1) that's hyperbolic, and 2) that's not why Germany's prices are higher than Canada's. 'But electricity is much cheaper in Canada!' (Doesn't say it's because of fossil fuels versus renewables, but it's implied.)
– Let's play!
dann is instantly checked by Stout and loses posession, the crowd goes WILD!
dann tries the strawman maneuver yet again by claiming Stout said something he didn't say. dann stumbles dramatically to the delight of the crowd.
dann tries to recover using the ole hyperbolic play failing to notice the "what I pay" phrase while also failing to note Stout said (98%) renewable energy. Whoops!
In sheer desperation dann falls to his knees and prays to his AI gods for some holy copypasta, the crowd boos as Bezos stuffs another one of dann's dollars into his wallet.
Realizing that the bribing politicians and blaming the radical right wing plays proved woefully ineffective, dann falls helplessly foreword into the mud. The crowd goes wild AGAIN!
Stout, of course, places the ball neatly into the net because he known all along exactly where the goalposts are. The crowd goes...
Stout, like his idol Trump, abandons all facts and reason and retires to his world of lies and make-believe.
And the crowd is ... bored stiff.
Meanwhile, in the real world:
Our Last, Best Chance to Cool the Earth | Bill McKibben (TED on YouTube, Aug 6, 2026 – 11 min.)
We're living through oil wars, wildfire smoke and extreme weather driven by a warming planet. But environmentalist Bill McKibben says one thing is finally going right: the price of clean energy has plunged, making it cheaper than ever to power the world without burning fossil fuels. He breaks down how energy from the sun became the best option on Earth — and why this narrow window of time may be our last real shot at a different future. "Energy from heaven, not from hell," he says. (Recorded at TED2026 on April 14, 2026)
4:32–> Sunlight travels 93 million miles to reach the Earth. But none of those miles go through the straight of Hormuz!
So, what good news! Unless, of course, you own an oil well or a coal mine. Then the rise of clean energy becomes an
extraordinary threat, one that mobilizes you to fight back. In the US, for instance, candidate Trump told the oil industry that if they donated huge sums, he would have their back. In his first year in office, he shut down huge wind farms off the eastern seabboard, killed solar farms across the country. Now, Trump can't stop clean energy singlehandedly. It's not like he's Jesus or something. Indeed, the economics are so favorable that even in the US, most new electric generation last year came from the sun and the wind. And the biggest growth was in the state of Texas, the home ground of big oil.
I hadn't noticed the YouTube channel Just Have a Think until today, but it has some great stuff, almost all of it climate-related, and it has been there for a while, for instance this one from last year:
Debunking the Climate disinformation (Just Have a Think on YouTube, Aug 17, 2025 – 18 min.)
China and India currently make up around 35% of all global greenhouse gas emissions. Some ask why countries like the UK, with only 1% of global emissions, should bother to strive for more national climate mitigation when large developing nations are apparently using coal, gas and oil to fuel their growth. And what about the cost of the green transition? And aren't we just being ALARMIST anyway? Wouldn't it be better to accept the warming and adapt to a new world? This week's video contains one or two thoughts on those suggestions!
The channel came to my attention today because because a new video from Just Have a Think was released yesterday and popped up in my YouTube feed today:
The Cleverest Climate Misinformation You’ll Ever Hear (Just Have a Think on YouTube, Aug 9, 2026 – 24 min.)
For more than four years, Steve Koonin's book 'Unsettled' has been cited by politicians, commentators and climate sceptics as evidence that the scientific consensus on climate change has been exaggerated. Koonin recently gave a 15 minute summary lecture of his views at the UK 'Alliance for Responsible Citizenship'. But are his arguments a fair interpretation of the evidence, or is he simply relying on carefully selected facts, cherry-picked statistics and misleading comparisons?
Notice how Dave Borlace – that's the name of the guy behind the channel – in his introduction to the video perfectly encapsulates the tactics used by Stout in his fairy tale about electricity prices and renewables for the past week or two:
If your goal is to propagate a message that is, let’s say, just slightly to one side of the absolute truth, you can either stand up in front of a microphone and flat out lie – which is the preferred route of some well-known political figures, OR you can employ a much more subtle set of tactics.
Maybe you start your argument with something that’s unquestionably and demonstrably true so that you establish your credentials as an honest broker. You could even concede a few important points that some members of your audience might have expected you to deny. That’s a great way to win over the confidence of those who may be sceptical about your motives.
And then, once you’ve shown that you’re a reasonable person offering only objective commentary, you can slide in a new claim that might be technically accurate but that doesn’t quite give the full picture.
And then maybe another one that relies on a very carefully cherry-picked statistic.
Follow that up with a few points that kind of blur the distinction between scientific uncertainty and ignorance, and if you’re lucky, or perhaps if you're skilful enough, you can guide your audience to a conclusion that none of the original, genuine facts actually demonstrate.
In comparison to Steve Koonin, Stout is obviously a rank amateur, but that's OK! In comparison to Dave Borlace, I'm a rank amateur, too.
But notice how Stout's propaganda also started out "slightly to one side of the absolute truth," i.e. electricity prices in Germany. Notice how it was cherry-picked and probably came to Stout from somewhere on the internet where another propagandist had posted it. If it were something he had come up with himself, he might not have made the stupid mistake of claiming that Germany's prices were the highest in Europe. Notice also that Stout by admitting to this very obvious blunder created the impression that he might actually be a serious debater, so he could then continue propagating his lie that renewables are more expensive than fossil fuels.
There is nothing the deniers of anthropogenic global warming love more than "a very carefully cherry-picked statistic."
WARNING! I tend to listen to YouTube videos while doing chores, often at a speed of 1.3 to 2. That's possible because many YouTubers don't make much use of the visual dimension. However, Dave Borlace does, so this is a video for sitting down and paying attention and maybe even occasionally pausing it to study the charts and graphs he presents.
As for Steve Koonin, the villain in Borlace's video, he is the kind of manipulator who makes full use of his 'freedom of speech', i.e. the right to lie with impunity. He is openly committing a crime against humanity and profits from doing so.
I am happy to see that this is already on Wikipedia's page about him even though the video wasn't released until 13 hours ago!
Steve Koonin (Wikipedia) 2026 Expose on Fraudulent Messaging
In August of 2026, climate journalist Dave Borlace, host of climate science magazine Just Have a Think, published a deconstruction of recent mis and disinformation perpetrated by Koonin.[54]
What I actually said was that renewables had failed to deliver on reduced electricity prices for the German consumer, not that renewables were more expensive than fossil fuels. An easy mistake to make if you think you've finally found a real life denier and your computer screen is covered in rage spittle. Also clouding dann's mind in the fact that I've sed less than flattering things about his holy dream society, China and correctly identified them as being the world's largest CO2 emitter.
Let's face it. This complaining about fossil fuels while burning fossil fuels, like flying to tropical islands, hasn't been much of a success. Actually, it's been a miserable failure. Everybody knows the that complaining about the products you're using to live your best life is a way to mitigate guilt and complicacy in the very process that have led to today's atmospheric conditions, few will admit it though.
So rage on about Big Oil, shift the blame, try to weasel out out of the fact that the consumers with their wake board boats, international vacations, long commutes so they can live in a bigger house...all the things that make life what it is, have made a massive contribution to the current state. I'm talking the 10% here, the people dann introduced to the conversation weeks ago. Always have been, always will be.
Good to see the gap actually widening but it's not really significant when held up to what I pay for my (98%) renewable energy. I pay about 20% of what Germans pay. So a little bit cheaper, but not actually cheap.
That's not what this is about. I'm sure there are people in Germany who have 98% renewable electricity too, and pay almost nothing for it. But we aren't talking about individuals or comparing countries - we're talking about typical costs in Germany with or without renewables, that's all.
New Zealand is lucky enough to have many large hydro sites. Unluckily however many of them are in the South Island, while most of the population is in the North Island. All the good North Island sites have been taken but the population continues to rise. Luckily we also have a geothermal site in the North Island, plus a bit of wind and solar. As a result we are currently (at 3:30pm on a cold winter's day) running 95% renewable. As more solar is put in up north we will get closer to 100% more of the time.
Which is great, but my supply charge is typically half of my entire power bill, because New Zealand is long and thin with a lot of mountainous terrain, plus there's a gap between the islands to get across. The result is that power lines and cables cost a lot to build and maintain. So I am typically paying ~US$0.40 per kWh. I don't mind though because that's less than 7% of my net income and electricity is very useful (it's my only energy source).
Germans apparently have a similar attitude. Their electricity might not be 'cheap' compared to some other places, but it's cheap enough that they don't mind. Germans are also environmentally conscious and so are happy to pay a bit more to improve infrastructure and increase renewable output. That's a good thing, right?
What I actually said was that renewables had failed to deliver on reduced electricity prices for the German consumer, not that renewables were more expensive than fossil fuels. An easy mistake to make if you think you've finally found a real life denier and your computer screen is covered in rage spittle. Also clouding dann's mind in the fact that I've sed less than flattering things about his holy dream society, China and correctly identified them as being the world's largest CO2 emitter.
Let's face it. This complaining about fossil fuels while burning fossil fuels, like flying to tropical islands, hasn't been much of a success. Actually, it's been a miserable failure. Everybody knows the that complaining about the products you're using to live your best life is a way to mitigate guilt and complicacy in the very process that have led to today's atmospheric conditions, few will admit it though.
So rage on about Big Oil, shift the blame, try to weasel out out of the fact that the consumers with their wake board boats, international vacations, long commutes so they can live in a bigger house...all the things that make life what it is, have made a massive contribution to the current state. I'm talking the 10% here, the people dann introduced to the conversation weeks ago. Always have been, always will be.
What I actually said was that renewables had failed to deliver on reduced electricity prices for the German consumer, not that renewables were more expensive than fossil fuels.
But this isn't true. 'Consumer' electricity prices have fallen dramatically from the peak in 2022. The graph shows that during that whole time - and increasingly now - renewables have made the price lower than it would have beenwithout them, which is what 'reduced' means in this context.
As for the absolute price, that varies hourly depending on supply and demand. Depending on the particular plan, the consumer may pay a fixed or variable rate. Fixed rate consumers have no incentive to modify their behavior so they pay more, while variable rate consumers can save a lot if they avoid using power at peak times. I don't know the details, but imagine they have plans similar to here where you get 'an hour of free power' or half price during times of low demand. Some also offer specific EV plans.
These variables make it difficult to predict the actual price because it varies depending on user behavior and weather patterns. However we can surmise that price spikes during peak demand will be lower when more capacity comes on line and the grid is upgraded to handle it. The initial saving may be tempered by infrastructure build-out. Once this is done bigger savings will be possible. Your accusation that renewables have 'failed to deliver' is premature.
They walk among us:
Just had a chat with someone who believed that global warming is an Ed Miliband conspiracy, to put taxes up following the financial crash.
Words like Cambridge Analytica, and hockey stick were used.
Don't vote for Green and Left wing parties with their anti economy policies aimed at stopping global warming. It will slow down the economy.
Keep using Oil and gas, it will never run out and always be cheaper, and who cares if comes from Russia and the Middle east, the oil will flow.
And now that droughts are disrupting trade all across Europe as glacier fed rivers suddenly dry up and stop ship traffic, harvests are burning in the fields and two wars fought by men with fragile little egos that need validation trough death have made all that economic growth evaporate and will cost far more in the future.
But the politicians who made those decisions are either dead, or retired somewhere with enough money to not be affected.
But keep demonizing the green and left, one day the right will make the sunlit uplands appear.
But notice how Stout's propaganda also started out "slightly to one side of the absolute truth," i.e. electricity prices in Germany. Notice how it was cherry-picked and probably came to Stout from somewhere on the internet where another propagandist had posted it. If it were something he had come up with himself, he might not have made the stupid mistake of claiming that Germany's prices were the highest in Europe.
To be fair, it's not just propagandists on YouTube who have been pushing that narrative. Pretty much all the news outlets have been doing it too. I'm not sure these journalists appreciate how much they are distorting public perception in their quest to get eyeballs on adverts. Some of them may even think they are doing a public service.
When you have a population that has made fear of change a political ideology, it's only natural for it to attract politicians who think the same. Don't think this is just is about politicians making money, for some it goes far deeper than that. It's no coincidence that the same people tend to espouse other conservative ideals.
The U.S. Supreme Court Will Hear a Major Climate Change Case This Fall (Time, Aug 11, 2026)
Fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas are the largest contributor to global climate change, accounting for around 68% of global greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90% of all carbon dioxide emissions. Major fossil fuel companies have long known—and sometimes hidden—the role their products have had in fueling the climate crisis. With climate change intensifying the impact of natural disasters, states and local governments are now facing billions of dollars in climate change-driven damages—and seeking accountability.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
's electricity prices are so much higher than 
's?
, 
